Yudisialisasi Politik dan Sikap Menahan Diri: Peran Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Menguji Undang-Undang

Abstract

In a review of the constitutionality of law or policy, the Constitutional Court can take an aggressive approach or choose to take self-restraint. Theoretical justification on the Court to change or made policy derived from the judicialization of politics. Global phenomenon indicates the shift of policy-making authority towards the judiciary. Consequently, policy makers shows resistence. Such conditions forced the Court to use a number of strategies to reduce political tensions between state institutions while at the same time the Court still protect the rights of citizens. The Court uses self-restraint approach to examine policies which in realm of legislative or executive discretion. This approach is referred to by the Court as an “open(ed) legal policy”. This study elaborates on the actions carried out by the Indonesian Constitutional Court to test the constitutionality of law or policy, both in the application of the judicialization of politics nor in the judicial restraint approach. In reality, the Court uses both of these approaches on review the constitutionality of law and policy.

Teori Opened Legal Policy Dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 90/Puu-Xxi/2023

“…Hanya saja, hingga kini konsep open(ed) legal policy yang dimaksudkan oleh MK masih belum jelas. Kapan suatu kebijakan termasuk dalam kategori yang disebut sebagai open(ed) legal policy dan kapan suatu kebijakan memiliki kandungan nilai konstitusional sehingga MK perlu untuk menguji kebijakan tersebut adalah pertanyaan yang perlu dijawab oleh MK (Bisariyadi, 2016). Dengan kata lain, MK perlu merumuskan serangkaian alat ukur untuk mempertimbangkan suatu kebijakan yang masuk dalam kategori konstitusional atau termasuk dalam kelompok open(ed) legal policy.…”